The PornHelp Blog

The Republican Party has approved a platform plank declaring pornography a “public health crisis”. This mirrors the passage earlier this year of a non-binding declaration by the Utah legislature to the same effect. The “is porn a public health crisis or isn’t it” question has been widely debated in the media, so we’ll avoid rehashing it here. But we do think it’s worth reflecting on what the insertion of pornography policy into a major party political platform could mean for those of us hoping for growth in research into pornography’s physical, behavioral, spiritual, and societal effects, and into effective methods of treatment. In short, it’s not good.

There is no secret that we are living in one of the most polarized political climates in decades. The absurdly low favorability ratings of both parties’ presumptive presidential nominees all but assure that come next January we will have a President who roughly fifty percent of the country despises, and with whom Congress may have even a harder time working than it has with President Obama.

The prospect of continued gridlock in Washington amplifies the risks and consequences of either party adopting a platform relative to pornography, because it channels the ongoing discussion about porn into the stifling confines of right versus left politics, with all of the vitriol and idiocy that follows from that myopic perspective. If we are not careful, soon we will see accusations flying that Republicans are “anti-porn” and Democrats are “pro-porn”. That Republicans hate sexual freedom, and Democrats love sexual exploitation. The race will be on to see who can be faster to accuse so-and-so of being a hypocrite, a deviant, or both.

Lost in that tumult will be the fact that people who struggle with problem porn use cannot be conveniently lumped into simple categories. While some research supports the notion that the more religious a person is, the more likely he is to perceive himself as addicted to pornography, there is no data (at least, none we are aware of) that supports the idea that problem pornography use only affects people of one political persuasion. Indeed, in our personal experience, people who struggle to rid their lives of porn have widely divergent political views, and want to quit porn for a variety of reasons, most having nothing to do with politics.

And, of course, questions about porn - which is, if anything, a multi-faceted topic - do not just touch upon over-consumption. Arguments have been advanced that porn promotes sex trafficking, misogyny, and violence against women, among other social ills. A person’s political leanings should not determine whether he or she supports research into these claims, and appropriate policy action if they are accurate.

We hope (naively perhaps, but sincerely nonetheless) that both major political parties will take care against politicizing the complicated question of pornography’s role in our lives and culture, and instead focus on funding quality research into porn’s effects, addressing any soundly demonstrated problems porn causes, and finding effective means of treatment for those for whom porn has become a debilitating problem. It would be a loss to everyone interested in tackling issues related to pornography if the discussion were to fall victim to the dysfunction of our current political climate.

I want to briefly address this sentence - "While some research supports the notion that the more religious a person is, the more likely he is to perceive himself as addicted to pornography"

"Perceived porn addiction" is an invention of a single researcher - Joshua Grubbs. His questionnaire (CPUI) does not assess perceived addiction - it is an actual porn addiction questionnaire. There is no such thing as perceived addiction questionnaire for any drug or behavioral addiction. I wrote a critique of the Grubbs's claims and his 2015 study here - http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/critique-perceived-addiction-internet-pornography-and-psychological-distress-examining-relationships

I will soon publish a more complete analysis of Grubbs's claims and string of papers. It's important to know that in Grubbs's first study validating his porn addiction test (2010, he stated his CPUI was an actual porn addiction test, and never use the term "perceived". An excerpt from his 2010 paper:

"The previously described models proposed for understanding behavioral addictions were the primary theoretical assumptions used to derive the instrument for this study, the Cyber-Pornography Use Inventory (CPUI), patterned after the Internet Sex Screening Test developed by Delmonico (Delmonico & Griffin, 2008). The CPUI design was based on the principle that addictive behavior is characterized by an inability to stop the behavior, significant negative effects as a result of the behavior, and a generalized obsession with the behavior (Delmonico & Miller, 2003)."

In 2013 he changed his mind, and with no scientific justification relabeled his CPUI a "perceived porn addiction test". Since his headlines and claims depend on his test assessing perceived addiction, this is extremely important. In the above article, you can see the 9-question CPUI yourself, and see how all other researchers use it as actual addiction test.

More spin. Grubbs’s statements, and articles about his studies, leave the impression that Grubbs found little correlation between hours of use and CPUI scores (porn addiction).

This is absolutely false. In reality, Grubbs et al. 2015 reveals a strong correlation between hours of use and CPUI scores. From p. 6 of the study:

"Additionally, average daily pornography use in hours was significantly and positively associated with depression, anxiety, and anger, as well as with perceived addiction [CPUI scores]."

Note: In Grubbs’s studies he uses the phrase “perceived addiction” or “perceived porn addiction” to denote the total score on his CPUI test (an actual porn addiction test). This is lost in translation due to the frequent repetition of “perceived addiction” instead of “the Cyber Pornography Use Inventory score".

Reply

PornHelp Team

7/12/2016 07:57:36 pm

Thanks very much for the clarification. In writing that sentence, we had in mind the Barna Group survey results released earlier this year. Does your critique apply also to the Barna data?

Reply

Gary Wilson

7/12/2016 09:20:57 pm

No I was only referring to Grubbs.
Did the Barna group use the phrase "perceived addiction"? What specifically were you referencing?

PS - I accidentally hit unsubscribe.

Leave a Reply.

Author

Longer-form writing from the PornHelp team on current topics relating to problem porn use and recovery.